PhotonTurtle

@Lians Thank you for the recommendation and insight. I'll read Damasio for needed perspective on emotions, not that you haven't given me some already. Again I appreciate the assistance, perhaps now I can sleep. On a side note, I ought to learn how to research a topic effectively.

Earlier today I found myself having an internal discussion on the concept of "personhood", specifically what is required for said distinction to apply. I determined that the presence of a consciousness is required which I (unoriginally) define as:1. Self awareness 2. Capacity for rational thought3. Ability to act as a moral agent During my internal dialogue I was unsure whether emotion ought to be included with my definition of consciousness. In the end, after much debate, I decided not to include it on the grounds that emotions are not predicated by the presence of a consciousness as I define it. Lesser animals, which do not have a consciousness, have been observed exhibiting emotion. Although I concede that a consciousness adds complexity to emotion, it is not required. Our consciousness after all is tasked with keeping our emotions in check, lest we act irrationally. At this point in my dialogue I asked what was necessary to act as a moral agent. I felt that "personal/individual values" was a sufficient answer as whether a moral agent acts morally or not is irrelevant. This response resulted in the question "How can we get values in the absence of emotion?" At this time, I do not have a satisfactory answer. I make this post for three reasons. (1) I wish to have my position criticized as it is not something that happens often. (2) Said criticism will hopefully lead me to become a more intelligent individual and (3) I am stuck. I can not think of an argument in which values are possible without emotion. I would truly appreciate other perspectives on this. Well, I look forward to reading people's responses to this sometime in the near future. Hope everyone enjoyed the holidays! PS: I'm rather unread on this topic,among others, and would appreciate if anyone could recommend good literature on the subject.

I would argue that empathy is not predicated on sonder. Claiming that sonder is required to empathize does not account for the fictional characters I (and possibly others) feel emotions for/relate to. I know personal accounts are the weakest form of evidence but I will use one anyway. The last book series I read was "A Song of Ice and Fire". During the time spent reading I began to relate to certain characters and develop emotions for them (admiration, hate, etc). All of this occurred despite the fact these characters did not exist. Sonder seems to be unnecessary for empathy.In hindsight one could argue that sonder is necessary even with the example of fictitious characters as the illusion that they carry on complex lives results in my empathetic reaction. I'll leave this for someone else to expand upon but I remain unconvinced of this notion at the moment. PS: First post...yeah!